Taylor Swift is a much-celebrated musician. Despite her young age, she’s written tons of songs, performed to sold-out crowds all over the world, made millions upon millions of dollars, etc. People love her, as well – she’s grown up in the spotlight without becoming a hot ass mess (at least not in any obvious ways).
Turns out, even people in the industry think she’s the bee’s knees. Take fun. lead guitarist Jack Antonoff (that’s the yahoo in the red hat in the photo above), who’s worked with Taylor before and can’t get enough. So much so that he believes she’s this generation’s Michael Jackson. Uhhhh… stop the press.
“I think Taylor Swift is one of the best songwriters ever,” Antonoff said.
“Taylor Swift is cool, because she’s the closest thing today that hearkens to Michael Jackson — to great, great pop music. There’s a difference between her and Gaga and Katy Perry and Lily Allen and all that. It all feels throwaway, comparatively.”
So, is Jack trying to bone, or what? It all seems a liiiiittle too enthusiastic for me. I like Taylor, and I think she makes decent pop music, but comparing her to Michael Jackson is WAY premature. Let’s all take it down several notches, shall we?
July 17, 2014 at 10:00 am by Jennifer
Taylor Swift wrote a lengthy op-ed for the Wall Street Journal in which she pontificated on the state of the music industry, declining record sales and her thoughts on how artists approach their careers. All I got from reading it is that TaySwift will never give you shit for free and you will always have to pay up, because she’s worth it.
Before I tell you my thoughts on the matter, you should know that you’re reading the opinion of an enthusiastic optimist: one of the few living souls in the music industry who still believes that the music industry is not dying…it’s just coming alive.
There are many (many) people who predict the downfall of music sales and the irrelevancy of the album as an economic entity. I am not one of them. In my opinion, the value of an album is, and will continue to be, based on the amount of heart and soul an artist has bled into a body of work, and the financial value that artists (and their labels) place on their music when it goes out into the marketplace. Piracy, file sharing and streaming have shrunk the numbers of paid album sales drastically, and every artist has handled this blow differently.
In recent years, you’ve probably read the articles about major recording artists who have decided to practically give their music away, for this promotion or that exclusive deal. My hope for the future, not just in the music industry, but in every young girl I meet…is that they all realize their worth and ask for it.
Music is art, and art is important and rare. Important, rare things are valuable. Valuable things should be paid for. It’s my opinion that music should not be free, and my prediction is that individual artists and their labels will someday decide what an album’s price point is. I hope they don’t underestimate themselves or undervalue their art.
This article does go on from there (and on and on…) and she waffles on about how much she loves her fans, comparing her relationship with them to an open romantic relationship and explaining how much heart and soul she puts into each of her albums. Look, T – you’ve got me. I’m convinced. You’re the real deal, a true singer-songwriter and the world loves you. I don’t need any more convincing.
On the other hand, I do get what she means in terms of female artists – and all artists, really – demanding what they’re worth. No one wants to work for free, and even artists want/need to make a living. However, I also don’t think anyone NEEDS $80 million. Ever. It’s just not necessary. There’s a difference between demanding what you’re worth and being greedy, but given that that’s the going rate of celebrity, I guess she’s within her rights.
July 8, 2014 at 11:00 am by Jennifer
Taylor Swift has a massive Rhode Island mansion, so it’s only natural that it’d serve as the location of her celebrity-filled 4th of July celebration over the weekend. Taylor hosted a slew of celeb friends, from Emma Stone & Andrew Garfield to the awful (and puzzlingly out of place) Lena Dunham, among others. Jaime King and Jessica Szohr were there, too, as was Ingrid Michaelson. And of course, it was all documented on Instagram.
Because I’m currently in the UK, I missed out on my Independence Day celebrations. And by “celebrations”, I mean “BBQ” because I love shit cooked on a grill. Hot dogs aren’t really a big thing over here, and that saddens me greatly. I suppose I’ll have to live vicariously through TSwift for now.
July 7, 2014 at 6:00 am by Jennifer
Taylor Swift has jokingly referred to herself as a cat lady before, and looks like she wants to live up to that title because she just keeps getting more and more of them as pets. She’s already the owner of an adorable little folded-ear cat called Meredith, and now Meredith has a new little sister in Olivia Benson.
Yes, she named her cat after a Law & Order: SVU character. Surprisingly, I’m behind this decision.
Here’s a question, though: Taylor is always traveling/out on tour. Who is looking after these animals? I mean, I know she’s rich and can afford to pay someone to do it, but it kinda seems pointless, to me?
June 19, 2014 at 5:00 am by Jennifer
Y’all know how much it annoys me that all we seem to do is make movies out of books instead of producing original cinema content, but I can’t really argue with an adaptation of The Giver, because it’s a classic and also, the movie looks REALLY good. How can you really go wrong when you manage to get Meryl Streep? And Jeff Bridges! (And don’t forget Taylor Swift! LOL)
You see my point.
In any case, the first full theatrical trailer is here and I can’t wait to see this! I think it looks suspenseful, exciting and really interesting. I don’t know that I’ve ever really used the word “suspenseful” in any serious context before in my life, but here we are.
What do you think? Will you see The Giver? Do your remember reading the book?
June 6, 2014 at 6:00 am by Jennifer
Taylor Swift is selling a hideous shirt that look like it came from some amateur’s CafePress shop which says “Lucky 13″ and has a picture of a shamrock on it. Here’s a pic for reference:
Well, apparently there’s a clothing brand called Lucky 13 and the owner, Robert Kloetzly, claims that Taylor is jacking his business and that her video, ‘I Knew You Were Trouble’, could be an outright advertisement for Lucky 13 since it features the type of kids he markets to.
The allegation is … Taylor is confusing the marketplace. In the docs, Kloetzly describes her as a tatted up singer who likes “fast cars and dangerous men who drive them inappropriately” — and adds that’s the same demo his company targets.
In the suit, Kloetzly goes on to claim Taylor’s music video for “I Knew You Were Trouble” could be an ad for his Lucky 13 … because it “depicts stylish, attractive, tattooed individuals in provocative situations.”
LOL, okay, sure. To be fair, Kloetzly’s clothes are just as ugly as TSwift’s t-shirt above. Get a load of this absolute shit:
Also, considering there’s a Wikipedia entry for “Lucky 13″, it’s hardly an original concept, idiot. However, this dude thinks he’s entitled to every scrap of profits Taylor’s made thus far or damages for his own company – whichever’s greater. NOPE. Go away.